a. MLT met on 3/2/04. Two budget templates were distributed: one
suggested by the system and an alternative that seems better suited
UHM's budgeting needs. There was extensive discussion of what UHM can
and cannot do with respect to budget processes. MLT also received an
update from the Kaka`ako Taskforce and the draft of a call for a new
taskforce on enrollment management.

b. The chair received the new OSA reorganization plan on Friday, 3/5.

c. The chair received a question about the appropriateness of expedited
tenure processes for an E/M appointee. The chair noted that the question
may involve both the Senate and UHPA.

a. SEC considered three alternatives: no action; letter to BOR from SEC;
resolution to be considered by Faculty Senate.

b. Lukas moved that SEC send a letter to the BOR regarding unnecessary
delays in administrative hiring. The motion was seconded and adopted
unanimously. Consensus was that the chair should develop the previously
circulated draft with specific mention of announced administrative
searches.

b. Resolutions
-CAPP on SAT/ACT
-CSA on Banner
-CPM on use of faculty names; on safety and security
-CAB on second presentation of charter and by-law amendments
-Possible CAB resolution on WASC system report handling

a. CA will meet on 3/17 to consider a resolution involving terms of the
faculty athletic representative appointment.

b. CAB met on 3/3 without a quorum; those present discussed system handling
of the WASC system report.

c. CAPP met on 3/3 without a quorum. Associate Dean Ron Cambra gave a report
on enrollment management. There was some discussion of a possible
resolution on changing the minimum GPA required for admission. The
committee will attempt to meet again on 3/10.

a. At 4:00 p.m., several CAB members joined SEC for discussion of system
handling of the WASC system report. CAB members present included professors
Vogt, Fuller, Bopp, Graves, Neilson, Popp, Singh, Bley-Vroman, and Sanders.

b. CAB chair Bley-Vroman reported that recent CAB discussion led to members'
presence at this SEC meeting. Some members felt that consideration of a
resolution of censure may be appropriate given what has transpired.

c. A wide-ranging discussion followed. There seemed to be consensus that our
real goal is regular consultation between administration and faculty. How
the system handled the WASC report, and how it handled the development of a
system response to that report, demonstrates a pattern of disregard for
reasonable consultation.

d. A consensus gradually emerged that in the absence of clear evidence on
who was responsible, and given the fact that the report came to faculty
attention so late that we have not had time for careful committee-based
review the contents of the report, we are limited in how we might respond.
We agreed that the process could not be ignored. Members then proceeded to
draft a resolution of no confidence in the system response to the WASC
report, in system processes related to the production of that response, and
in the system administration that devised those processes.

e. The draft resolution will be circulated for comment of those who were
present. Final wording will appear on the Faculty Senate website. The
resolution will be presented to the Senate as a joint resolution of CAB and
SEC.